What demos have been heard?

[Eileen]

There is often commentary about how closely Elvis followed studio demos. Have any demos made their way into circulation beyond those released by Don Robertson?

Thanks for any info,
Eileen

[elvisjnr]

the demos for songs Elvis never recorded for the supposed to be january 77 sessions, were released on ' a cold night in nashville cd', along with demos for way down and i got a feelin in my body were on that cd. they are not too different from the demos, except Elvis's voice, but the whole original demo feel is still kept

[Daryl]

Hello,

I believe Paul Evans' version of "The Next Step Is Love" along with a few of his other recordings is available on a CD. I'm thinking that "Something Blue" might be on this CD as well but I'm not positive about it.

Daryl

[ColinB]

John -

You wrote:

...and of course a whole host of originals where Elvis just followed the vocal as sung by the artist.

Even when Elvis used the arrangement from another version of a song, he always brought something of himself to it.

At his best, he took over ownership of the thing, and made it his own !

[Eileen]

Thanks for the info all, I've given a listen to the items mentioned. Daryl yes, the Something Blue demo is also on that cd.

I've heard a [negatively meant] Ray Charles quote to the effect that "Elvis sang everything the same".... it does seem he had a point, post-Sun anyway. Not being creative myself I struggle to put words to my thoughts. Elvis did seem to a) mostly copy what he heard and b) perform a song one way once he settled upon his rendition. He didn't much explore what could be done with a song, nor his skills as a musician (once he became established), nor attempt songwriting. Whatever that type of musical/creative expression would be it didn't seem to be a need for him, or at least one he continued to explore. Perhaps because once he was beyond the equal footing of Elvis/Scotty/Bill there wasn't much of a partnership opportunity where he felt safe or inspired to do this - afterwards most everyone involved was in his service to some degree. For Elvis that seemed to make it riskier to go out on limb, given his insecurity. Or perhaps due to his view of himself as more of a hired hand, so to speak.

An article I read called Elvis "the human jukebox" - not perjoratively, as I recall. That might be a fairly accurate summary of his musical talents. His ear for a melody, sense of rhythm, ability to express himself vocally, and his beautiful voice.... I believe he was linguistically gifted in some respects however don't know the proper jargon at all. It's a different talent (or set of talents) than what Charles meant. Personal gifts rather than self-expression via the act of creation.

I'm pondering the topic.... your thoughts are welcome.

Eileen

[likethebike]

I think Elvis in the demos is way overblown. I have the Don Robertson song sometimes he stays close, sometimes he goes more on his own. If he liked Robertson demos why change?

( I disagree about "Money Honey" being exactly the same it is similar but certainly not an exact replica and the Drifters' version of "White Christmas" is dominated by the bass singer. The only part that is an exact cop is the chorus. )

If he didn't like the demos he changed them. Mort Shuman for instance commented on the changes Elvis wrought on "Little Sister" about how he cut the song's tempo. If Elvis liked the demo, which were recorded in an approximation of the way the singers thought Elvis would like to hear them, he saw no reason to change them.

The same goes for songs Elvis remade. "I Really Don't Want to Know", "Any Day Now", "Stranger in My Own Home Town", "Reconsider Baby" among others bear very little relationship to any previous versions.

And many, many terrific singers Frank Sinatra and Aretha Franklin among them honored previous arrangements of hits and very often made personal statements with those renditions. Listen to Aretha's very fine version of Dionne Warwick's "Walk on By".

As much as I love Ray Charles his comment stems from an ignorance of Elvis' music. No one I repeat, no one could say Elvis sings "Hound Dog" the same as "There's Always Me" the same as "It Hurts Me". It's just a stupid comment. Elvis' version of Charles' "I Got a Woman" is a terrific example. Although, Elvis' basic arrangement is clearly modeled on Charles, the tempo is sped up, there's a new ending and Elvis' garbled phrasing is completely his own. He sounds like nothing like Charles on the song. Nothing.

And anyone who has heard Freddie Bell's "Hound Dog" a kind of Louis Jordan jump blues knows Elvis' version of the song is a million miles from his. Bell- tempo change and lyric change. Elvis- the rest.

[ekenee]

I don't give a hell what Ray Charles said. Out of all the R & B singers that Elvis liked and covered their material, I like Ray Charles the least. He sounds off key and flat on so many songs, I can't listen to him. His vocals are so whiney similar to Neil Young which I also find difficult to handle.
This subject is a good one and here are my thoughts.
I have too compared the various covers and so forth. What looks to be an exact copy is not always exact. Elvis always had subtle differences in the way he sung a song, just as he does when we listen to the studio outtakes. If you listen to a couple of takes of "Like a baby" for example, they appear on the surface to be the same but they are not. This is one of Elvis' abilities, is to do the same Performance over and over again and we still find something new about it. This is why we buy all the soundboards. He can copy an arrangement, but he still puts that Elvis stamp on it. Of course there are exeptions but why do you think we crave every outtake that can be found. In essence all this disproves what Ray Charles said. And furthermore Elvis started out sounding like nobody, and doing R & B and country songs like no one before him. Elvis really doesn't need to be defended at this point by anybody. He is as they say, "second to none" .

[Juan Luis]

I heard Otis blackwell's demo of Make Me Know It and it is excellent. Elvis did it somewhat different and just as good but not better.

[Tallhair AKA Ger Rijff]

Sorry Woodly, Elvis his version of Tryin To Get To You is not a blue print from The Eagles [ black group] original.

[Eileen]

As much as I love Ray Charles his comment stems from an ignorance of Elvis' music. No one I repeat, no one could say Elvis sings "Hound Dog" the same as "There's Always Me" the same as "It Hurts Me". It's just a stupid comment.

I don't think that's what he meant. I think he meant.... what I said - that Elvis didn't make significant stylistic changes in the vast majority of his renditions, particularly the b) I mentioned.... the Elvis' rendition of I Got A Woman, for instance, was essentially the same every time Elvis sang it. He didn't do a country rendition in 1974 vs. a blues rendition in 1972 vs. a rock rendition in 1970. Once Elvis settled upon a particular feel and phrasing for a song that's generally where it stayed. At best he'd speed up a track out of boredom or show timing.

I'll be off pondering your other comments for a bit. Thanks LTB.

Eileen

[Eileen]

Sorry Woodly, Elvis his version of Tryin To Get To You is not a blue print from The Eagles [ black group] original.

Hi Ger. If you have anything further to say about what it WAS, please do so. I'm off listening to clips based on comments in the thread.

==========

A general comment... one thing I was struggling to say, is that Elvis didn't seem to be interested in creating, or have the ability to create or imagine creating, something out of nothing (or next to nothing)... that does seem a significant reason so many folks might not equate Elvis' Hound Dog with the Floyd accomplishment Dark Side of the Moon.

Eileen

[likethebike]

I'm not sure who changes their renditions of songs all the time but Elvis did revamp many songs and many like "Hound Dog" or "Reconsider Baby" morphed in Elvis' mind over the years before he arrived at their final renditions. Look at "Trying to Get to You" in 1955 and "Trying to Get To You" in 1968 what a difference. Look at the Jackie Wilson inspired ending he lops onto "Don't Be Cruel" on the Sullivan show. Again I love Ray Charles but I think his comment came from not really listening or listening with cultural bias.

Elvis' recordings and vocals were what he created. And in many ways they are personal and original an expression of himself as "Dark Side of the Moon."

It's very ironic that a Charles comment brought this up as so many songs that Charles recorded brought out the best in Elvis. Listen to "I Can't Stop Loving You" especially the MSG version. It has everything you could want and completely upends the meaning of the song on the page and becomes an entirely and original work. Elvis screams out the opening and then fashions almost an improv vocal with lines being repeated and words and phrases being broken apart and sewn together again. All this backed by an instrumental arrangement including James Burton's blistering guitar that seems to cover the entire gamut of popular music. And concluding with a great fake ending that he certainly did not use everytime out. The overall effect turns this despairing country song into a song of triumph. The title might as well be "I Won't Stop Loving You." This is the same trick Elvis used on many songs especially "Mystery Train".

Comparing Elvis' reading to Charles or Don Gibson is fruitless because Elvis is mining a completely different vein. Ray Charles remade Don Gibson. Elvis came up with something completely new. As Ernst would say, you could say you like one more than the other but you can't say it's the same.

[Eileen]

I have the Don Robertson song sometimes he stays close, sometimes he goes more on his own. If he liked Robertson demos why change?

If Elvis liked the demo, which were recorded in an approximation of the way the singers thought Elvis would like to hear them, he saw no reason to change them.

That's my point, or one of my points anyway. He apparently didn't have a need to create in that way - to really make something different and new himself out of what was. There was no burning desire to see how he might re-fashion this thing. As you said yourself, twice, he could imagine no reason to change it - vs. folks who climb mountains just because they're there.

This likely also explains why Elvis wasn't looking for material between sessions nor instructing his employees to do so. Why? He didn't HAVE to create something until he was scheduled to be inside the studio, and then not until he was actually there. He just didn't have the need. He was seemingly just as satisfied, maybe more so, to sit in his piano room singing his nth rendition of an old gospel song.

Eileen

[Luuk]

I have quite a few "original versions" in my collection and some Elvis just copied but more often Elvis changed the style of the song and it became an "Elvis song".

Also in the studio Elvis changed songs.
Have a listen to the complete session (or what's released) of for example Viva Las Vegas, Ain't that loving you baby (slow and twist versions), I got stung, Loving you, Treat me nice.

[likethebike]

That's not necessarily true. Elvis brought many songs to sessions. The reason Chips Moman has disowned much of the Memphis session was because of Elvis' tendency to wander off on his own. "Stranger in My Own Home Town," "I'll Hold You in My Heart", "Without Love", "I'll Be There", "After Loving You" are all Elvis' songs not Chips. Elvis sang all the time when he was alone and at home with friends.

Spontaneity both with and without the demos was a big part of Elvis' creative process. It's just a different way of working. It was how he worked at Sun as well.

But beyond that as I said he brought many songs to the studio as well and many other songs he apparently thought through 100 times over. His version of "Memphis" is a topic on another thread. This was a song he came into the studio determined to record in 1963. He went through a number of times without success. Then in January 1964 he scheduled another session solely to do that song. In 1972, as "Separate Ways" originated with Red West he almost surely knew that song going in and knew he was going to record it. The lone song he wrote "You'll Be Gone" is another example as is West' "That's Someone You'll Never Forget". The first session back from the army was clearly building up in Elvis during his entire time in Germany. "It's Now Or Never", "I Will Be Home Again", "Girl Next Door Went a Walking", "Reconsider Baby" all had their genesis either in Germany or farther back. "Hound Dog" is another example. I don't know what it sounded like when Elvis and the band first tried it on stage. But look at the transformation and evolution of that piece just from the Berle show to the studio version only weeks later. "Can't Help Falling in Love" was a piece that Elvis heard in Graceland as the boys who were going through demos planned to throw it out. Again Elvis knew this was something he had to record.

Even the Robertson pieces hit on the same thing in a different way. The heart of the pieces represented a challenge to Elvis vocally and emotionally. He even jokes in the studio about "There's Always Me" that "this is MY song." Robertson recalled Elvis playing him his acetate and letting him know that he understood every nuance of the lyric. He respected what Robertson hit on in the demos because that was something that he needed.

[Eileen]

Elvis' recordings and vocals were what he created. And in many ways they are personal and original an expression of himself as "Dark Side of the Moon."

You used both terms here that I've been (that word again) struggling with. I'm thinking that Elvis used music as a vehicle of expression, not particularly as a medium of creation.

Many highly creative people use multiple mediums because they have an intense desire to express themselves via creation of something. Many singers also paint and write and design. They just have to create something, something from nothing. Whereas with Elvis it just seems that the very act of singing, singing anything whereby he could express himself, was his thing.

Interpretation... that's one of the words I've been needing... a few months ago I mentioned on a Prince board that interpretation was such a devalued talent, and has been for years. Some of the comments folks have made in the thread speak more to Elvis as an interpreter I think.

I just saw we're typing at the same time LTB, so this isn't a response to your post just above mine.... I have to read that one yet.

Eileen

[likethebike]

I think you're splitting hairs a bit. Elvis' records and shows bore his personal stamp over all others. And it is the record and show above all else that is his creation or expression however you want to put it. It's something that would not exist without him. A song called "Hound Dog" would exist but it wouldn't be the same. When Alfred Hitchcock made a movie it was his movie despite the fact that he did not write the movie, did not star in the movie and did not act in the movie. He didn't even really coach actors. He was however the overall guiding force in the movie. In picking the script, picking the cinematographer and the actors and telling them what he wanted and by adding his own personal touches with the camera angles, he was the creator. Elvis is very much in the Hitchcock mold although there are differences. Elvis was very much an artistic force unto himself virtually unlike any other artist in the recording industry.

[Gregory Nolan Jr.]

In brief, "here, here " to LTB's stand.

I don't think Elvis' artistry should be demoted
although it's a fair question, as many in music still fail to appreciate
what a genious he was, on par with the Beatles, Stones, Dylan,
Sinatra, Miles Davis, Coltrane, etc.....and yes, Ray Charles.
I'm frankly surprised at Eileen's comment and concur with LTB
that it's hair-splitting. Guys like Jorgensen and Semon, and others
have gone a long way to celebrate the King as a revolutionary
artist in music.

(As for Ekenee's crack, I have to wonder about anyone who dismisses Ray Charles on one comment. Elvis was clearly a fan of him and other such R&B legends.
Listening only to Elvis will warp you...and make you appreciate
him even less, ironically I file Ray's comment under "sour
grapes" rooted on the real racism of the industry that he and others
did in fact face.)

I've heard a lot of the originals (though no demos!) and love what he did with them.
They are the proof. However, his version, his cover of "Feel So Bad"
unfortunately was a little too close to Chuck Willis' when I finally heard it ten years ago, I cringed.
Anyone else would say "what a copy cat Elvis was..."

I also think the interest in alternate takes (PLATINUM, CLOSE UP, TTFF) and on FTD, as well as soundboards means that people appreciate
the "different" versions he cut...!

Let me also suggest folks check out Piers' excellent essays on
Elvis on the Creative Edge - 'The First Cut Is The Deepest', a 2-CD
compliation I recently acquired...

[traxfax]

I hope you will enjoy this one:

'Playin for Keeps' demo

At the tender age of 12 she presented herself at Sam Phillips' studio and informed Marion Keisker that she whished to sing. She was given a hearing and then informed that her voice wasn't good enough and it was politely suggested to her that perhaps she would be better off selling her sights on becoming a secretary, or something of that sort. Barbara was mightily upset by this rejection to the extent that she cried her eyes out for a couple of days.

However it is Elvis himself that Barbara credits with her start in the music business. At the time that Elvis was working the Eagles Nest under the auspices of DJ Sleepy Eyed John Lepley, Barbara was a mere 10 year-old. Her mother and Elvis got to know each other and as a result Barbara got to know Elvis. He recommended her to Sleepy Eyed John who auditioned her and she got the job at $5 a night. Her friendship with Elvis continued even atfer Elvis had left Sun.

Elvis persuaded Barbara to do a demo for him of a song written by Stan Kessler called "Playing For Keeps". "Well I did it in Elvis' key and style and Elvis bought it. He took this dub over to Sam Phillips. Well Sam listened to it and said, ‘my Lord who the heck is that?'. He liked what he heard. Just think, and I was told a year earlier that I didn't have enough talent to sing". At all events she was signed up to Sun and her first single was recorded in 1956 along with several members of Clyde Leopards' Snearly Ranch Boys including Clyde himself on drums, Bill Taylor on trumpet, Buddy Holobaugh on guitar and Joe Baugh on piano.

[Eileen]

I don't think Elvis' artistry should be demoted although it's a fair question, as many in music still fail to appreciate what a genious he was, on par with the Beatles, Stones, Dylan, Sinatra, Miles Davis, Coltrane, etc.....and yes, Ray Charles. I'm frankly surprised at Eileen's comment and concur with LTB that it's hair-splitting. Guys like Jorgensen and Semon, and others have gone a long way to celebrate the King as a revolutionary artist in music.

To me it isn't about 'demoting' his artistry, it's about our (or my) ability to succinctly articulate how his artistry/creativity manifested itself, particularly when so many of us agree that it isn't generally recognized as compared to other legends in music. I appreciate being in a like-minded group of folks when it comes to musical taste, however I don't think we're here because we have some special ability to recognize talent. (peanut gallery: "We do so!!")

I don't think it's splitting hairs to acknowledge that there are generally recognized indicators of creativity/artistry that are exhibited by persons who ARE widely lauded as creative geniuses, and to examine Elvis' work in relation to those indicators. Then if Elvis' process didn't follow the dots in those ways, consider how DID his process work, how DID it manifest itself, and how is it shown that his process, his work, is on the same level as those others?

All of the comments here have been pondered and appreciated. None of them, in my opinion, have countered my observation that Elvis, for the most part, did not exhibit the usual signs of someone burning to create for the sake of creating, nor did he exhibit a broad, generally artistic bent.

Consider the Graceland furniture; the red 'brothel' furniture was a set, the jungle room furniture was a set - he didn't look for (or find) individual pieces of furniture and accessories over time to 'design' his environment, as one often sees in broadly artistic people. He didn't seem engaged by artwork (painting, drawing, sculpture, etc.). He didn't explore artistic hobbies. He didn't explore vocal or instrumental music beyond the basic commercial styles of his era. He didn't explore songwriting. He didn't try to excel or even much improve his early, basic instrumental musicianship. I've read nothing that seriously contradicts those statements - are they not factual?

So then I'm pondering what his gifts indeed were and the signs of those gifts and trying to find appropriate words and phrases to name all that. And using the helpful information offered as evidence to consider and explore.

Eileen

[likethebike]

He did explore songwriting with "You'll Be Gone" but he was extremely uncomfortable with the idea. It's also a misnomer to state that he didn't expand his skill a musician. There seems to be no question that one of the things he was doing during his free-time in Germany was learning how to sing in an expanded singing range. He simply could not have done "It's Now or Never" in 1957. He didn't have the technique at that time. You also have to consider how his artistic explorations were stifled by his non-supportive environment. Billy Goldenberg recounted to Jerry Hopkins how Elvis, during breaks from the '68 special, would practive Beethoven's "Moonlight Sonata" on guitar. Elvis could only get so far and Goldenberg would come in and show him how to play the next part. The minute "the guys" would walk in, Elvis would stop and play it cool. There was no encouragement not from Parker, not from Priscilla or anyone to learn. In fact, with the guys this kind of growth, even the Memphis sessions, were a sign of losing face.

It's important remember that in Elvis' world there was no "A" for effort ever. "Flaming Star" didn't make as much as "Blue Hawaii" it's a flop. "You'll Be Gone" wasn't that a good song. Leave songwriting to the pros. Even some of his most diehard fans have been decrying his decision to expand away from rockabilly for 40 years.

It is bewildering to say that he didn't explore any other music styles. It's been well documented that he basically listened to everything. Priscilla recounts that Elvis' artist when he met her was Mario Lanza. I doubt Johnny Cash went this far afield. Even today I run into few music enthusiasts with tastes as broad as Elvis'.

Elvis' creativity manifested itself in his recordings and in his performances both live and in the studio. Those are his creations. Also, his creation was himself which he created over and over again. Look at the way he changed his dress and hair.

Look at Elvis' gospel recordings. Every one of his gospel albums pays tribute to a different tradition. It's not as if he stumbled upon one gospel style and kept that. From the way he deploys his voice, to the arrangements, and the material everything each time out was fundamentally different. "How Great Thou Art" was a work that was literally months in the making.

The things you are naming have been basically deemed the artistic spirit by middlebrows. Elvis did not grow up with the same sense of artistic pretension that was foisted upon these other artists.

Also delegating is not a sign of artistic weakness. Sinatra did it all the time.

[likethebike]

Alfred Wertheimer remembers the "Hound Dog"/"Don't Be Cruel" session in his book ELVIS 56.

"The demos were straightforward renditions without much style but the lyrics were sung clearly and audibly. 'Anyway You Want Me' was followed by a song written by Otis Blackwell.

When it ended, Elvis said 'Let me heard 'Don't Be Cruel' again. Somethin' I like about that one.' As they played it again, Elvis gathered the sheet music withdrew to the speaker and faced the corner. With one hand leaning against the wall, he stood alone as though waiting for his baby's train that had long since gone. The song ended, 'Baby it's just you I'm thinking of. He came back and said 'That's the one I want to try.'

Strumming his guitar with the sheet music held in his hand, he quickly found the melody. By the time everyone gathered around the piano, he had already memorized the lyrics.

Elvis played his version on the keyboard to Shorty, who noted the changes on the sheet music, while the musicians played it for themselves and the Jordanaires harmonized a bebop.

The problem was the opening. Elvis asked Scotty 'Whaddya think?'

Scotty replied with his guitar 'Dum-dim-da-di-di-dum-dem.'

Elvis thought it over and said 'Try a little more space.'

Scotty came back, 'Dumm, demm, ba-di-da- dumm, demm, ba di da."

Elvis smiled. Steve raised an eyebrow. DJ joined in slowly.

Elvis thought for a moment and said, 'DJ come in behind Scotty and slow it down a little.' Hoyt Axton (sic) of the Jordaniares suggested a 'Bop Bop!' at the end of each refrain, and in 20 minutes they had a version ready to go.

Elvis asked 'Whaddya think Mr. Sholes?"

Steve replied 'Ok, Elvis let's try it.'

It was the first time I had seen material prepared at the recording session itself. The convention was that everyone arrived prepared to record. The choice of material was made beforehand and the musical arrangements written so that expensive studio time would be devoted to working out minor details.

After hearing the first rehearsal take, Steve said, 'Sounds good to me. Want to go for a take?' Elvis answered directly 'No, I wanna try another rehearsal.'

They tried it again. Elvis changed his interpretation from a bouncing bop to the more intimate feeling of a lover deeply hurt. He was giving himself a choice.

As the two takes were cued up, Elvis was constantly moving, shifting, changing pace. He was not very talkative. Some people carried on nervous conversations. Elvis let his body move. Often the only way the musicians knew how well they were playing was by his mood and movements. Rapidly changing movements meant uncertainty. A glint in the eyes meant good. A flashing smile said great.

After listening to the two rehearsal takes, Elvis smiled with satisfaction and said, 'Let's go for one.' He didn't say which one, it wasn't necessary. The musicians and the Jordanaires knew their parts and it was up to Elvis to make any changes.

Without the interruptions caused by his rocking off-mike, there were a few short-takes and the momentum of the music quickly gathered everyone into a joyous foot-tapping, finger snapping spree. The band was tight and Elvis was loose. At take six, Steve, who was in the control room nodded and everyone knew they had it. Once he had a good rendition, Elvis knew he could take a risk. He wanted to try a few more."

Here on a song he had never heard before using a demo he respected and reflected, we can see Elvis creating something original. Before deciding to use the song, Elvis thinks about it with no little degree of intensity. He changes the arrangement and creates two interpretations of the song. He apparently chose one closer to Blackwell's demo (if Blackwell is to be believed and he is but only to a certain extent because everyone naturally inflates their own importance). Then he leads the band through his the performance. What is created ultimately bears his signature above anyone else's.

Now Wertheimer, who wrote this description in the 1970s, didn't have a perfect memory but he clearly remembered an original creative process not simply an artist copying a demo.

Writing about "Hound Dog" he wrote: "The working relationship on that session was a departure from what I had seen at other recording sessions. Other artists I had covered were directed by a producer. He was the man in charge, and often the atmosphere was formal and businesslike. With Elvis the mood was casual, relaxed, joking. Steve did not dictate, he managed. And though Elvis was not a forward, take-charge character, he was clearly the one that had to be pleased. When it concerned his music, no one was more serious."

Wertheimer also recalled the sometimes torturous playback process where Elvis tried to move the wheat from the chaff.

He also recalled the end of the session when everyone was ready to wrap up after "Don't Be Cruel". Elvis wanted to stay and do "Anyone Way You Want Me."

Wertheimer gets at the bones of Elvis' creation in his description of that song. "His voice cracked, then it broke. He became so fragile in his plea that you had to believe him. 'Any way you want me, that's how I will be.' It was more than his voice that made the girls cry; he made them cry because he made them believe."

That to me is beyond interpretation and mere craftsmanship.

[Eileen]

I've hit my quota of "that's not what I said" for the week.

Eileen

[likethebike]

I think that's because your point on this topic is far too amorphous. If you're asking why Elvis didn't choose to work in the ways some other artists did, you just can't expect everyone to fit in the same mold. It's that way with everything. If someone has an unorthodox style of working it doesn't matter as long as they get the job done.

I respect that you're trying to get at something deeper but I can't figure out what it is.

However, you did state that there was no evidence that Elvis attempted to improve himself musically, listened to other types of music or explored songwriting. On these points, I just pointed out that there was evidence to the contrary.

[Eileen]

Okay, I'll violate my quota because I would feel horribly rude to ignore your two additional posts, and did appreciate that you were typing the Wertheimer material while I was drafting responses. And you might be right about "too amorphous".

>>no evidence that Elvis attempted to improve himself musically

That's not what I said. I said his "instrumental musicianship", presuming that meant instruments. However in my first 5 drafts of a response I did concede the phrase could be misunderstood.

>>listened to other types of music

That's not what I said. I said, "beyond the basic commercial styles of his era". I believe his mother listed to Lanza and gospel, for one. And other stuff I said in my first 5 drafts of a response.

>>I respect that you're trying to get at something deeper but I can't figure out what it is.

Thank you. If I can figure out something that might help on this point I'll post it.

Eileen